From: Colin P. <cp...@do...> - 2000-12-23 20:33:02
|
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 11:41:41AM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote: > On Mon 18 Dec 00, 8:24 PM, Florian 'Proff' Schulze said... > > Maybe we can see how ZDoom has done it when the source is released and then > > reimplement it, so we don't have licensing issues. > > it's not GPL? considering that the author claims to have used lxdoom and > MBF code, maybe if you guys asked him, he'd reconsider whatever license he's > currently using. Both ZDoom and csdoom come with the GPL license now; it's kind of complex though, because they include Hexen code which can't be legally used in a GPL program (and Raven have made it clear they aren't changing that). IANAL, but the legal situation right now looks like: - it's illegal to take Hexen code via any route into a GPL project - it's therefore illegal to compile or use (recent versions of) zdoom or csdoom - it's legal to use code from zdoom or csdoom in a GPL project, provided you know who the author is and it's not from Hexen And a thousand curses on Raven for their stupid license, and on all those foolish enough to have got entangled with it. -- Colin Phipps <cp...@do...> http://www.cph.demon.co.uk/ |